Notes on the Second Part of Spinoza's Ethics (II)

JSTOR is part of ITHAKA, a nonprofit organization that supports academic institutions to use digital technology to protect academic records and promote research and education in a sustainable way.

© 2000-2018 ita ka. Copyright JSTOR®, JSTOR logo, JPASS®, and ITHAKA® are registered trademarks of ITHAKA. Artstor® is a registered trademark of Artstor Inc. ITHAKA is an authorized dealer of Artstor Inc.

2nd and 3rd Part II on Spinoza's ethics Part II: Spinoza's idea and epistemology Neven Knezevic Simon Fraser University nevenk@sfu.ca 7 summaries on Spinoza In the second half of the lecture, Spinoza's thought description and ethics of ethics and We will cover the second half of the survey. Like the previous lectures, we conduct a detailed investigation on a few propositions of the Code of Ethics and briefly introduce the main contents of this section. I will explain the relationship between Spinoza 's explanation of spiritualism and its rationalism, the foundation of his philosophy, his explanation of body movements, and how this approach is based on the understanding of the mind for the body. A description of Spinoza 's truth and error and sufficient and inappropriate thinking; three kinds of Spinoza knowledge; and his basic body of psycho - psychology related to part 3

Lecture on Part II and Part 3 of Spinoza's ethics: Part 2: Spinoza's thought and epistemology

Spinoza's Code of Ethics is divided into five parts. The first two include metaphysics and discuss physical and mental relationships separately with God separately. In the first part, Spinoza regards God as infinite and unique material for all reality. Please note that the philosophical term "substance" used here refers to the whole that we can not directly experience. Some of Spinoza's contemporaries and some contemporary classmates believe that there are several substances. The most famous is that RenéDescartes (1596-1650) has two kinds of problems, thoughts and problems, each thinking it has its own idea and extension. He further insists that everyone is a kind of interaction combination between the two substances. In contrast, Spinoza is an infinite and comprehensive substance, not only because it is infinite, inclusive, but also creative, I think that there is only one substance equivalent to God.

By doing this, Spinoza has defined the substance as "the substance itself, it is conceived by itself" (Ethics Part 1, Definition 3). In other words, a substance is part or an aspect of the essence of self-creation (Spennosha and Spinosism, Stewart Hampshire, 2005). In Spinoza's term, a substance is an active nature, or Natura naturans ("nature of parenting", or "the nature of nature") - he is therefore the same as God. In addition, because its definition includes the required existence, we can not deny that this entity exists. Since it is infinite and comprehensive, there can be only one substance